Putting the AI in Paris
28 May 2025
Jack McRae crossed the Channel to attend TradeTech Europe in its 25th year, to see what talking points were dominating the asset servicing space
Image: image by eyetronic/stock.adobe.com
Paris is one of the most popular cities in the world for tourists from across the globe. While the French capital may attract millions seeking out a glimpse of the Eiffel Tower, a look at the gothic architecture and a taste of its delectable pastries, in May 2025, it was playing host to TradeTech Europe. The buy side equity trading conference, held a stones throw away from the Arc de Triomphe, is in its 25th year, and sought to tackle some of the key discussion points dominating the industry in 2025. As expected, the importance of AI and automation continued to dominate the panel discussions as firms seek to get ahead of the competition.
The bigger, overarching question that persisted, however, was how AI can be best applied in firms’ existing workflows and operations. The industry will continue to look to innovate, but perhaps it is time to be more considerate when it comes to applying to technology.
The industry came to Paris looking for answers to some of their concerns and queries about the ever-evolving technology space and how it will impact financial services.
AI concerns?
So what could be the possible concerns when it comes to implementing AI into trading operations. The attendees at TradeTech 2025 had a mixed range of concerns.
In a discussion between Mathias Eriksson, head of global equity execution at Andra AP-fonden (AP2), and Rob Boardman, CEO of Virtu Execution Services, EMEA, members of the audience were polled about their concerns.
Regulatory and compliance risk (31 per cent), lack of explainability (26 per cent), and cost or resource required (22 per cent) stood out as the leading concerns members of the industry hold.
“What are the concerns?” Boardman asked the crowd, before considering the results. “It is quite a mixed bag, with votes in all categories. These are things which you probably think about internally, Mathias. Do you have any questions internally about the use of AI in trading?”
Eriksson replied: “There are always people who are sceptical — It doesn’t matter what organisation you are in. But my feeling, from an AP2 perspective, [our teams] are encouraging us to use new technologies.”
He continued to explain that these teams do conduct thorough evaluations of risks. He also added that replacing the human with AI in the process will not make the process perfect — but nor should it.
“It’s not a question of ‘is the AI perfect?’, but of ‘is it better or more optimal that what we did before?’,” Eriksson said.
The impact of AI in trading was also considered in the proceeding panel focusing on automation and analytics. Stuart Lawrence, head of equity trading at UBS Asset Management, stressed that AI is the future — and is developing rapidly.
“I think anyone who sees AI as something to replace them is not looking at the full picture,” Lawrence explained. “It is a very useful tool that we can use to make our lives easier, and I expect it to come quickly.
“I go back to the previous presentation and most of us aren’t using it from a trading perspective. [But] where we can use it, is for mining that historical data.”
Lawrence believed that using AI to consider historical data which can then be put back into the algo wheel is “the next step.”
He added: “I think having that historical data and the depth of insight that that can bring can really inform real-time routine.”
A warning
Automation may have continued to be a dominant talking point throughout the conference, but the tone of conversation was far more serious — with experts warning that failure to implement key automation processes could result in businesses being lost.
In the panel assessing the UK and EU’s approach to T+1 settlement, key talking points focused on how settlement misalignment between regions is impacting trading dynamics, and what the latest UK and EU timelines for migrating to T+1 are.
Kicking off the conversation, one panellist was already urging firms to consider how they would respond to T+0 (same day settlement), let alone T+1.
“T+0 is around the corner and you won’t be able to do that without automation,” they argued. “Why would you want to do one migration to T+1 and then do another one in just a few years? Why not do a single migration now, so that you are effectively T+0 enabled?”
Another speaker echoed the sentiments. “Automation is key,” they began. “And that’s where maybe the regulator also comes in to incentivise.
“We have to maybe mandate some sort of automation.”
One of the key discussion points centred around the lessons that could be learnt from the US transition — a successful move, but one made possible through increasing the number of bodies working in the process.
On the transition, a member of the industry said: “I think it went a lot more smoothly than we thought. We had a lot of the infrastructure there already.
“One of the things about T+1 is that it has put pressure to use risk to manage settlement date mismatches — which maybe isn’t a bad thing — but it has added cost.”
They pointed out that these costs lie in having to move or extend settlement dates.
At the heart of ensuring readiness for T+1 is in the preparation and financial investment in middle and back offices — something that has definitely increased.
One panellist added: “I think over the last couple of years, with the Central Securities Depositories Regulation, especially in Europe, a lot of companies have invested into their middle office and back office. That awareness has definitely increased.
“Nowadays it’s pretty important and it is agreed that it increases the cost of trade if you don’t [invest].”
The UK, EU and Switzerland have confirmed a shift to a T+1 settlement cycle on 11 October 2027.
One industry member was pleased with this alignment, stating: “I think the regulators did a good job with the EU, UK and Switzerland aligned by the date.
“I’m confident that the industry will manage, [but] talk to your custodians, talk to your brokers, talk to the regulators. Get ready.”
But what advice should the industry take to get ready?
A speaker argued that the existing published guidance for the UK will help firms get ready for the shift, but added that this was not mandatory and it was up to the individual firms whether they wanted to follow the guidance.
They said: “At the end of the day, firms need to decide if they want to be an effective market participant or not. If you do, you will need to automate. So better to do that sooner rather than later.”
As for Europe, a panellist explained that, “there is still time to get involved in the work.
“We are working together with the industry committees to define what are going to be the regulations and what will be industry market practice. It’s very important that everyone gets involved, not just post-trade. It’s really the whole [market] that is concerned so it is very important to get involved.”
The discussion finished with a final warning to firms who prepared for the US shift to not become complacent.
“You may well be in the category of lucky individuals who have built a system for complying with T+1 in the US which will work in Europe and the UK, but please don’t assume that is the case,” a speaker insisted.
They added: “Don’t assume compliance and then don’t do the work to reconcile what you need with what you have built. I just want to issue that word of caution.”
Tick, tock
Whilst there remains caution when it comes to accelerating technological advancements, there is little doubt that automation and technology will forever be at the forefront of industry discussions.
TradeTech 2025 only reinforced the belief that firms who do not maintain pace of change in regards to modernising their technology could be left behind.
As the European asset servicing industry races towards the shift to a T+1 settlement cycle in 2027, the need to get ready is paramount. The industry cannot afford to follow the US’s method of simply throwing more bodies at the issue.
The clock is ticking.
The bigger, overarching question that persisted, however, was how AI can be best applied in firms’ existing workflows and operations. The industry will continue to look to innovate, but perhaps it is time to be more considerate when it comes to applying to technology.
The industry came to Paris looking for answers to some of their concerns and queries about the ever-evolving technology space and how it will impact financial services.
AI concerns?
So what could be the possible concerns when it comes to implementing AI into trading operations. The attendees at TradeTech 2025 had a mixed range of concerns.
In a discussion between Mathias Eriksson, head of global equity execution at Andra AP-fonden (AP2), and Rob Boardman, CEO of Virtu Execution Services, EMEA, members of the audience were polled about their concerns.
Regulatory and compliance risk (31 per cent), lack of explainability (26 per cent), and cost or resource required (22 per cent) stood out as the leading concerns members of the industry hold.
“What are the concerns?” Boardman asked the crowd, before considering the results. “It is quite a mixed bag, with votes in all categories. These are things which you probably think about internally, Mathias. Do you have any questions internally about the use of AI in trading?”
Eriksson replied: “There are always people who are sceptical — It doesn’t matter what organisation you are in. But my feeling, from an AP2 perspective, [our teams] are encouraging us to use new technologies.”
He continued to explain that these teams do conduct thorough evaluations of risks. He also added that replacing the human with AI in the process will not make the process perfect — but nor should it.
“It’s not a question of ‘is the AI perfect?’, but of ‘is it better or more optimal that what we did before?’,” Eriksson said.
The impact of AI in trading was also considered in the proceeding panel focusing on automation and analytics. Stuart Lawrence, head of equity trading at UBS Asset Management, stressed that AI is the future — and is developing rapidly.
“I think anyone who sees AI as something to replace them is not looking at the full picture,” Lawrence explained. “It is a very useful tool that we can use to make our lives easier, and I expect it to come quickly.
“I go back to the previous presentation and most of us aren’t using it from a trading perspective. [But] where we can use it, is for mining that historical data.”
Lawrence believed that using AI to consider historical data which can then be put back into the algo wheel is “the next step.”
He added: “I think having that historical data and the depth of insight that that can bring can really inform real-time routine.”
A warning
Automation may have continued to be a dominant talking point throughout the conference, but the tone of conversation was far more serious — with experts warning that failure to implement key automation processes could result in businesses being lost.
In the panel assessing the UK and EU’s approach to T+1 settlement, key talking points focused on how settlement misalignment between regions is impacting trading dynamics, and what the latest UK and EU timelines for migrating to T+1 are.
Kicking off the conversation, one panellist was already urging firms to consider how they would respond to T+0 (same day settlement), let alone T+1.
“T+0 is around the corner and you won’t be able to do that without automation,” they argued. “Why would you want to do one migration to T+1 and then do another one in just a few years? Why not do a single migration now, so that you are effectively T+0 enabled?”
Another speaker echoed the sentiments. “Automation is key,” they began. “And that’s where maybe the regulator also comes in to incentivise.
“We have to maybe mandate some sort of automation.”
One of the key discussion points centred around the lessons that could be learnt from the US transition — a successful move, but one made possible through increasing the number of bodies working in the process.
On the transition, a member of the industry said: “I think it went a lot more smoothly than we thought. We had a lot of the infrastructure there already.
“One of the things about T+1 is that it has put pressure to use risk to manage settlement date mismatches — which maybe isn’t a bad thing — but it has added cost.”
They pointed out that these costs lie in having to move or extend settlement dates.
At the heart of ensuring readiness for T+1 is in the preparation and financial investment in middle and back offices — something that has definitely increased.
One panellist added: “I think over the last couple of years, with the Central Securities Depositories Regulation, especially in Europe, a lot of companies have invested into their middle office and back office. That awareness has definitely increased.
“Nowadays it’s pretty important and it is agreed that it increases the cost of trade if you don’t [invest].”
The UK, EU and Switzerland have confirmed a shift to a T+1 settlement cycle on 11 October 2027.
One industry member was pleased with this alignment, stating: “I think the regulators did a good job with the EU, UK and Switzerland aligned by the date.
“I’m confident that the industry will manage, [but] talk to your custodians, talk to your brokers, talk to the regulators. Get ready.”
But what advice should the industry take to get ready?
A speaker argued that the existing published guidance for the UK will help firms get ready for the shift, but added that this was not mandatory and it was up to the individual firms whether they wanted to follow the guidance.
They said: “At the end of the day, firms need to decide if they want to be an effective market participant or not. If you do, you will need to automate. So better to do that sooner rather than later.”
As for Europe, a panellist explained that, “there is still time to get involved in the work.
“We are working together with the industry committees to define what are going to be the regulations and what will be industry market practice. It’s very important that everyone gets involved, not just post-trade. It’s really the whole [market] that is concerned so it is very important to get involved.”
The discussion finished with a final warning to firms who prepared for the US shift to not become complacent.
“You may well be in the category of lucky individuals who have built a system for complying with T+1 in the US which will work in Europe and the UK, but please don’t assume that is the case,” a speaker insisted.
They added: “Don’t assume compliance and then don’t do the work to reconcile what you need with what you have built. I just want to issue that word of caution.”
Tick, tock
Whilst there remains caution when it comes to accelerating technological advancements, there is little doubt that automation and technology will forever be at the forefront of industry discussions.
TradeTech 2025 only reinforced the belief that firms who do not maintain pace of change in regards to modernising their technology could be left behind.
As the European asset servicing industry races towards the shift to a T+1 settlement cycle in 2027, the need to get ready is paramount. The industry cannot afford to follow the US’s method of simply throwing more bodies at the issue.
The clock is ticking.
NO FEE, NO RISK
100% ON RETURNS If you invest in only one asset servicing news source this year, make sure it is your free subscription to Asset Servicing Times
100% ON RETURNS If you invest in only one asset servicing news source this year, make sure it is your free subscription to Asset Servicing Times
